Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
signal-tools

signal-tools

by craft-agent
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Read account status

signal_account_read
Read-onlyIdempotent

Reports account linking status, sync service health and the person's next step for one label or all labels, reading local state only without network access or writing data.

Instructions

Report account linking, sync service health and the person's next step for one label or every label. Reads local state only, needs no network or daemon, and never writes anything. Other people's text never appears here; no message content, phone numbers, account ids or keys are returned.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "signal_account_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoThe account label; absent lists every label.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountsYesAccounts sorted by label; no phone numbers, account ids or keys.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description adds substantive context: reads local state, no network or daemon required, never writes, and it enumerates what is deliberately excluded from the response (message content, phone numbers, account ids, keys). That privacy/side-effect disclosure is real value. Minor tension with openWorldHint=true, since a local-only, no-network read sounds closed-world, but this is not a clear contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the outcome the tool reports, then the operational profile and the privacy boundary. Nothing is padding — every clause either states capability or removes an agent's doubt.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose, and the annotations carry the safety profile. The description therefore covers the remaining burden well, though 'the person's next step' is left unexplained and would benefit from one clarifying clause.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema ('The account label; absent lists every label'), and the description only restates that behavior. At 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 applies; no extra syntax or format guidance is contributed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Report account linking, sync service health and the person's next step') scoped to 'one label or every label', which clearly separates it from signal_chat_read, signal_contact_read and signal_message_send by resource. It stops short of explicitly stating how it differs from those siblings, so it lands just below the top mark.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'for one label or every label' implies the two calling modes (with or without the account argument) but never says when to use this tool rather than a chat/contact read, nor gives any exclusion. Usage is inferable from the resource name rather than stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools